Menu

The political football culture: scouring for humanity

(A small note regarding the title, which apparently causes a bit of confusion – “scouring” means searching for something intensely).

Far from claiming any of us, simple absorbents of media (however opinionated), can make an actual difference through how we position ourselves on the political spectrum or outside of it, this post deals with issues of conscience in an increasingly polarised world.

While it’s a known fact neither the left nor the right promote unity, political fury in the west is perhaps stronger now than it has been for many years. Are we, as human beings, in danger of being degraded by the baseness of the political spectacle? At which point does the media’s intoxication affect us intrinsically?

Headlines are being made out of social media posts and small comments, as those in office debate each other in the style of pimps outside a brothel; the left and right have become experts at turning bits of flotsam into the pillars of their positions, scooping up the dregs from each barrel to further inebriate their audiences.

Even the neutral can gradually be pulled in one direction, on a cause-by-cause basis, by the so-called alternative media, slowly climbing onto a bandwagon.

The total abandonment to a wave of energy generated by propaganda now resembles football stadium dynamics. While on a football stadium this temporary abandonment can be cathartic and harmless, in real life it can cause people to truly dehumanise others, in manners formerly deemed left behind in history books.

Counterculture or counterfeit?

Since our teenage years, attempts are made to co-opt us into a solid set of beliefs and principles, often feeling the need to make a choice between conforming to the moment’s education and “rebelling”. The other day I heard from various sources that conservatism would be the new counterculture; right-leaning people see it as an optimistic perspective after being pummeled by the left for so long. The realisation came that this cut and dry left/right duality is portrayed as an unavoidable cycle to maintain in the future, as if no alternative were possible.

How authentic is any culture formed as a diametral response to another, each grabbing hold of society until reaching an extreme; why want to replace it with its polar opposite instead of reaching a unifying compromise? Are leftists and right-wingers really different species expected to keep fighting for domination in perpetuity? Is the right expected to behave any differently than the left does now when climbing its way to power again?

Perhaps this is what we are meant to believe in order to remain at each other’s throats.

Blurring the lines between facts and rhetoric

Media outlets, including alternative ones, have mastered the art of invalidating a point of view just because it is strongly held by the ideological opposition, regardless of whether or not it might make sense at least partially. Nit-picking on marginal issues, diversion and placing an event within a one-sided context can be made to look like factual reporting. Factual reporting presents both sides of an issue. When the versions you hear from opposing outlets portray events in such an antithetic way you’d think they came from different planets, prepare to wonder whether subtle or gross manipulation is involved, potentially on both sides, no matter how much you tend to agree with one.

Today more than ever, one is nudged to censor their critical thinking as an issue of loyalty, when often agreeing with the stances of a peer group. When suddenly disagreeing, mobbing may occur. Proof of this loyalty can be requested at any time since discussions occur between larger groups and more publicly than ever before. The pressure to pick a side can be substantial.

Trusting inflammatory outlets which change their tune for their own agendas

Choosing a trustworthy news source is not easy, as so many are skilled in gripping people’s interest, often done today by claiming to have inside information on issues most of us cannot obtain information on directly.

It wasn’t long ago (a few years, roughly) that InfoWars and the like were spreading theories regarding false flag terrorist attacks, impending martial law and the use of artificially generated fear in order for states to draconically control the masses. Apparently, terrorism was a manufactured excuse to create “police states”. There was a FEMA camp hysteria and descriptions of vans coming for millions of people in the middle of the night and “disappearing” them, never to be heard from again. Police brutality was constantly deplored, as well as increasing police presence and militarisation.

Fast forward to present day and this tune is being blared in reverse, with the same amount of gravity and confidence. Now, according to the same people, terrorism is actually caused by religious fanatics and no longer a ploy to “take people’s freedoms away”. In fact, they constantly promote a president who wants fewer restrictions on how the police can act, who wants more security forces on the streets supervising and raiding. And what takes the cake, who wants a massive “deportation force” to… snatch millions of people from their homes, day or night, intern them and have them “disappeared”. The system they made people dread for years is taking shape now and they are cheering it on, as it will affect only one part of the population and not the one embracing their rhetoric.

All throughout, they have been claiming to operate based on the same principles. Is there any intellectual honesty in this? Has there ever been? In the mean time, fortunately, nobody in the west has died for lack of a water filter.

How does the outlet with the largest amount of paranoia regarding the political system suddenly read like state-sponsored propaganda, with 8 out of 10 daily articles fiercely supporting anything Donald Trump does or says, down to writing one article per critical tweet? At what point does this become nauseating and transparent?

“Fighting the good fight”

Although discussing politics has always been uneasy to an extent (hence the “no politics or religion at the dinner table” suggestion), there used to be some decency, some restraint in this before social media provided immediate access to verbal matches with “detractors”. Nowadays, comment sections on any subject become septic tanks of bile, some of it undoubtedly a release of personal tension.

One can easily end up berating a stranger, to then berate the stranger’s mother, ancestors and dog, in only one paragraph, the benefits of which elude rational thinking. How much of this is even real; how much of it is social engineering and paid agitation?

People prone to politically motivated savagery need no more than a few slogans barked or sung with the right intonation in order to start chanting along and raise their fists in the air, as if contaminated by a tribal virus. Some then take to the streets, smash them up and beat up random strangers. For others, it takes more subtlety. It takes refined language, astute humour, intricate rationalisation. Which is fine and dandy until a barrier is crossed and whatever category has angered them, at least at that moment, ceases to be human.

Entertainment is more politically charged by the day

Even this form of escapism, which has always been manipulative yet in an insidious manner, is now blatant in its pushing of social messages, being not artful but artificial.

Besides the standards imposed by progressives (quotas, trigger warnings, forbidden humour etc), we find ourselves being told what to think and how to vote by wealthy singers and actors (which is infantilising), and even shamed in this sense. Art for the sake of it has become rather rare. Somehow it all pulls people back into the mindset of having the obligation to stand and propagandise for one cause or another.

Factions denouncing propaganda while engaging in it

Propaganda, as most people know by now, seeks to attract individuals into groupthink, and one technique used is finding a symbol for a cause (a person or event) to imprint into collective memory as representative of a broader issue. Which is not wrong in and of itself as long as it doesn’t push for the blurring of other aspects related to the same matter.

What I find rather disgusting, when the media approaches an event, let’s say regarding victimisation or wrongdoing, is that it’s usually highlighted by one side and minimised by the other, regardless of what the reality is, as both are in defence of groups, not individuals. The actual story is lost in an endless spin; people caught up in a certain situation become pawns in political debates. When exposure actually damages the person presumably helped and the media perseveres, it’s a case of exploitation; when they milk the story dry, the person is left to deal with the consequences (often involving harassment) of being the poster hero or victim of the day .

More queasily, each side accuses the other of jubilation when having a victim to push forward; in other words, one side has every right to feel outrage and sympathy, but the other doesn’t. Ordinary people become lost in narratives, to often face undeserved public scorn, based on the side supporting them, in a dog-eat-dog fashion, as armies of ideologues feel the need to tear them down in order to reinforce their views. The truth could be anywhere and is no longer relevant as long as enough points are being scored.

Regardless of how the media makes it look, there is always the option of remaining moderate and approaching any coverage with cautiousness, refusing to label oneself and be spurred on by propaganda, even when a peer group reinforces it enthusiastically. It’s important to remember that no movement is safe from being corrupted and taken over for an entirely different agenda.

And no matter how trustworthy, charismatic and convincing our sources are, they too are fallible and could be surfing a wave to an unknown destination.

There comes a point, when soaking up biased coverage to reinforce a point of view, one needs to take a step back and think deeper. No matter how much it might seem appropriate to reach generalising conclusions regarding groups of people, their accuracy should always be questioned, as that attitude is likely meant to serve someone else’s purpose.

Fair Use Notice

This blog may contain copyrighted material, the use of which has not been specifically authorised by the copyright owner, made available for the purposes of criticism and satire. This site will never be monetised and none of the material displayed here or its criticism will ever be used for financial purposes.

Additionally, feel free to use any original material found on this blog for any purpose you see fit.

For anyone wishing to get in touch, the email address is thecultureoffalseoppression@gmx.com .

49 thoughts on “The political football culture: scouring for humanity”

Thank you for doing this. Do you know if there would be any repercussions from sites / owners / authors such as Psychopathfree for anyone here who would speak out against what they are doing or share examples? What if the person was a former moderator with inside knowledge?

To the best of my knowledge, there wouldn’t be, as free speech is protected in the US. Plus, such criticism exists elsewhere on the internet; the best example being the comments on Amazon; the discussion continues there. I’ve also read similar criticism of other websites, for instance on complaints.com . I think one is safe enough if they stay away from false claims or exposing the private lives of the people involved, as in details which could help identify them in real life.

Surely there is a limit to their viciousness, a limit imposed by tact; they can only go so far without scaring their members off.

Otherwise, any present member would look at their tactics and think ”I could be next”.

I actually wasn’t sure but then again they are based in the US and people there aren’t persecuted for offending others, if they tell the truth. Not yet, anyway.

European countries are losing their minds, so to speak. Any unwanted approach or comment is seen as a crime, for being slightly bothersome. The word “criticism” becomes hollow of meaning when people can no longer express it.

You talk a lot about Psychopathfree here, but no other forums, except links to specific sites and people without naming them outright. Why is that? I only ask as this update comes after I tried to post a lengthy review of 9 different sites / people on the internet who are leading the social justice warrior cyber movement on psychpathology — 2 of which are credentialed, reliable people and whom I do not represent or work for. My 9 reviews began with the biggest game out there all the way down to smaller sites and ending with reliable sources to show the lunacy of all of it.

All of what I posted was directly, word for word, from 9 websites describing who they are, their credentials and how their site works and drives the meme. Psychopathfree was ONE of my reviews, and the most embarrassing if you read the leader’s bio and credentials that are published in the book and website. Nothing new was being shared except for the mega tech machine that runs it. If I would have instead focused on my 18 months at PF and spoke of specific treatment by administrators and moderators, the sick strategies and hurtful things they’ve done to people (as has been going on here the past few days with examples everywhere) then my post would have appeared?

Your update, and not posting the content of my review, leads me to believe this blog is entirely for anyone burned by Psychopathfree.

The reason I talked about Psychopath Free specifically is that I have not been on any other toxic forum of this type and want to avoid making assumptions without being able to personally verify them. So whilst I shared other people’s complaints about the sites, I can’t make any of my own, as I have no personal insight (sorry, I wrote interest).

Sorry about the quick and superficial response; I’ll answer later when I can actually focus on what was posted.

Thank you for your reply, and for posting my summary of the 9 sites. Even though I spend the majority of my time on PF (and am still active there yet mainly lurking), I visit all the other sites I’ve listed and have spent a considerable amount of time trying to figure out what the hell is going on regarding the huge psychopath bandwagon movement. Those 9 seem to have the most traffic for whatever reason.

This interests me because of my line of work, not because I’m obsessed with these people or sitting in my mother’s basement with nothing better to do. In a nutshell, I am a behaviorist and study patterns of behaviors for a living. The online movement provides me with lots of ‘data’ for a particular study I’m designing. The reason I wrote the summary, and mainly it’s just a brief synopsis of titles and credentials, was to show how ludicrous it is that people are making money off of others’ experiences while using their own as the springboard. Most of these sites are basically treating members in much the same way that the abusive person has over time. Since I do study human behavior, what I find very sad is how gullible and trusting humans are to complete strangers, and with their mental health at stake.

I must say that I spend more time on certain sites than others, mainly because of the ease of navigating forums. PsychopathFree is the most user friendly, for example, and easiest to read and follow, and always full of drama. It’s the best example to-date of a toxic forum run wild!

From what I’ve noticed, people who are too open and trusting tend to think it is only natural for others to respond in the same manner, whereas that only happens when one is lucky. On a large scale, with a large group of people, I am bold enough to say it never happens. In a large group people will be suspicious, nit-picking and will read other messages into what a person is saying. Exposing oneself on the internet is comparable to taking your clothes off on a busy street, in the middle of the day.

Unfortunately circumstances such as severe depression make one care less (if at all) about the repercussions, as they often feel they have nothing to lose anyway. Add to that the ”bug” of overexposure the young generation has caught (or been infected with, more accurately) and you end up with people who no longer see the limit between public and private; a limit well known to humanity for thousands of years.

OK, so I did get it right the first time; I apologise for your comment not being visible when you posted it, which led to the assumption that it hadn’t been approved on purpose. Comments have to be approved prior to becoming visible to filter out spam. A comment posted from a different time zone may take a few hours to be seen, if the person is commenting for the first time; all subsequent comments are approved automatically. There was no rudeness or hidden agenda behind the delay.

Thank you again for the information.

About the update, it came as a result of realising that the discussion is much more expansive. It’s great to interact with people sharing their views on recovery forums; however, in terms of writing other blog posts, there isn’t much else I can bring to that subject. The additional information is (and hopefully will keep) being brought by people who take the time to comment.

Yes, Maria, I think you’ve done an excellent bit of work here in laying the foundation for what is going on regarding this campaign or movement. Obviously you know your stuff, and I can’t argue with any of what you have so succinctly laid out. Hopefully others who have been hurt by these forums, or who need a Wakeup call as to what is really going on behind the scenes and for what purposes, will find this site and take heed. There’s nothing left to do now accept wait for continued stories, and how sad is that, really?

I don’t really; all this is common sense though; most people can see when a certain view snowballs into hysteria. Hopefully all this talk about spreading awareness in schools (it’s funny how this word is used to describe denial, which is the exact opposite) is unrealistic.

Hope you don’t mind me asking. I am going to have to write in code here because I will be referencing someone who is always on the lookout for online defamation. She is interested in psychopaths and currently lives in France. She has a following. You might know who I am mean. Have you researched her schtick?

I wrote this awhile back for a forum about esoteric subjects. It’s about the inherent difficulties one can encounter online trying to get help or to disseminate information about psychopathy and the aftermath of being targeted.

Warning:

Frequenting a support group where all the administrators and mods are anonymous, (regardless of the practical reasons for maintaining anonymity) is like attending a masked ball. As their identities are veiled they can act with a certain amount of impunity.

Some support forums do a decent job in spite of this. The administrators remember they are dealing with fellow human beings who possess a full panoply of emotions and attitudes. If they have a problem with a poster the mods address it thoroughly using the private message feature. They don’t cold shoulder, deny they are having a problem with the poster and then–when confronted– expel them from the forum.

They don’t refer to the expelled poster as toxic, nor would they accuse her of ulterior motives. They would never conclude after an attack of this nature that they made the forum safer by expelling her.

They do not dissect or post mortem the re-victim’s posts, after the fact, in a virtual kangaroo court. Nobody should be subject to this, particularly someone on a support forum for victims of abuse.

People who have suffered any kind of trauma should think twice before seeking help online. The online realm can feel compellingly real– where people can be sincere or insincere, have depth of spirit and emotion and concern or anything and everything in between.

The new forum member won’t necessarily glean an understanding of the state of mind of the forum controllers unless she trips some emotional wire. And when mods, admins have hyper-vigilance issues, you might not know when or how you are tripping wires.

If you observe any of this kind of behavior and sycophantic fawning from a small tight circle of posters, towards the administrators or moderators, exercise caution. The forum may help you, but the potential is there for it to hurt you when you can least afford to be hurt.

Ideally, those who have been through a psychopathic encounter which turned out to be tragically superficial need help from real people, in a real space, who are accountable for their actions. Failing that, an online forum presided over by a qualified unmasked professional who can be held accountable for her online behavior should be a minimal requirement. A professional therapist, familiar with group dynamics and traumatic stress can point out the tendency to over interpret and categorize too broadly, as it occurs. In other words knee jerk fundamentalist thinking or, ‘to a man with a hammer, every(one) looks like a nail,’ isn’t as much of an issue.

You’re right on the money with that evaluation… The other thing is that while everyone is masked and covered from head to toes, they invite you to get practically naked by sharing your intimacy, then turn around and collectively laugh at you, like in one of those twisted dreams you’re happy to wake up from.

Happy to find this blog and astounded that my experience with PF forum is such a common one. It was a very unsettling experience to enter on to a forum with nothing but the best intentions and high regard for the mods and Peace, to end up being treated like I was a social deviant, a few short weeks later.

I had no idea what I had done to raise their ire. I didn’t disagree with anybody’s point of view. There was no condescension on my part towards any members. I was well liked and my posts appreciated…a lot. A former moderator of PF who was hounded off the forum, suggested this might be the reason I was banned and I guess it might be true.

I received high praise from other members fairly quickly and according to this fellow, that is what bugged them. I was respectful and friendly but must admit, I didn’t gush, genuflect nor bow down and kiss the mod’s or ‘Peace’s’ ass. I was friendly, courteous and had a high opinion of them. I’m sure that came through.

It seemed to bother the mods that I described myself as being pretty much healed, though still a bit fragile. Also, that I was there to help, that I didn’t require help.

I think now, the only reason they didn’t boot me off even sooner was because they were trying to figure out who I was. I told them, quite honestly, that I had to be very careful about revealing my identity, as my husband is a public figure. That must have set their gossip sensitive antennae twitching!

Through recovery forums it is very easy for those who have been traumatized and are so inclined, to want to reenact the trauma from a position of power. They are in a perfect position to do this as moderators or administrators.

As they ‘help’ you, they are sensitized to any comments or opinions that will afford them the opportunity to press the delete button on your person, on your being. In so doing they are re-traumatizing those who have already been cruelly and often discarded without warning, or closure. How is this ANY different than psychopathic abuse? Same dynamic.

Yes, it’s not the first time someone mentions their alarm bells going off when seeing a member whose posts are appreciated by others; an admin actually mentions that in a post regarding trolls, claiming some register to ”garner their own following”.

As an adult, to me it looks like schoolyard jealousy, replacing the more mature desire to cooperate on equal terms and add to the common project as much as possible.

I like the gist of your blog here. You have created something of great value and the commentary from various posters, speaking out, is also very helpful.

After I was targeted by a psychopath and wandering through the strange world of online recovery forums, I saw several patterns emerging. The worst one was the tendency towards fundamentalism.

Dividing people into two camps; psychopaths and the rest of us, for example. The potential for social harm and a new ‘ism’ is huge. As you have described Maria, there is no room for, ‘maybe,’ or ‘can we look at this a little more closely,’ or reasoned CALM discussion.

There is no middle ground, no doubt, no uncertainty. Some of this is typical and a stage most targets go through. The job of any recovery forum should not be to ‘validate,’ every person who joins the discussion, about whether they were abused by a psychopath, nor that they are surrounded by them in all of life’s avenues. Psychopathy is an untreatable disorder. It is the human spiritual embodiment of evil. Believing that a fairly large percentage of the population is irredeemably evil, is harmful to the psyche and spirit.

A person doesn’t have to be a psychopath to do tremendous harm to somebody else. It is enough that the person was harmed and needs to talk about it.

The problem with splitting black and white is all empathy stops for those who can be shoehorned into the ‘black box,’ and I am not just talking about P’s or jerks, but new members on forums who trip some emotional wire, they are unaware of. If enough people on a forum join in this exercise, a witch hunt mentality can easily ensue. The forum is a microcosm for the greater society

People who think that they can create a Utopian society forged out of the bedrock of this kind of black and white thinking may think they would be surrounded by lovely people, looking to join others, basking in the adoration of one another. In fact, they would be entering a world that looked a lot like Liberia or Sierra Leone, or the show Survivor, where each member, one by one, would be voted off, for some minor infraction.

Something is definitely going on today – not sure what, but traffic has quadrupled over the last few hours, most of it through Facebook. Either many people are becoming interested or many people are getting pissed off; it’s one of the two. Or both. 🙂

Clique-ish forums with irresponsible mods and administrators, intoxicated with a little power, might just have the tables turned on them.

More disclosure from those who have been mistreated, deleted without proper warning and then had their lives scrutinized and information shared behind the scenes should speak up. This is NO way to treat those who have often already suffered so much.

If there is one truism that springs to mind for me on reading this interesting analysis, it is that those who have been subjected to abuse are often prone to recreating in encounters with others in society that which they suffered from themselves. No one who has been through abuse should endeavour to help others before they have gone through sufficient therapy and/or an adequate period of restitution and return to normality. Our systems are full of people projecting their own stuff onto others and wanting to *help them* whilst affecting quite the reverse.

Objectivity used to be valued; now it seems that it doesn’t matter anymore and people with an ax to grind can be trusted in situations where they are likely to be very biased, even if they’re not aware of it.

A woman by the name of Alison Gunson Wyecaple from Herefordshire in the UK who runs a Facebook recovery forum, and is the founder of the Facebook group Children of Narcissistic Sociopathic Parents Support Group. She is also involved in bulldog beeding and competitions in England.

In 2012, she published the real life names of all the women she disliked on her recovery forum to the same doomsday cult forum as part of some strange psychotic vendetta against these women. She then invited the cult leaders onto her group to act as security team in order to ‘warn’ the women who remained. Most of the women she ‘outed’ were involved in custody battles and other legal proceedings against their exs. The last thing they needed was outing and she used the doomsday’s cult forum to name them. It was a shocking and wicked spectacle. All this can be easily verified.

She is thoroughly disturbed and dangerous individual for women seeking help and is also involved with psychopathfree. Any women on her groups are open season for her to publish their names publicly when she is having one of her psychotic episodes.

Without mentioning any names, do you know how the hissy fit started? This is why it is so important not to share anything without carefully vetting the individual beforehand. I doubt this person is a professional, and help under conditions of anonymity, that are not honoured are very troubling.

Someone should set up a central registry, a better business bureau, for people who are barely operating within the law.

Your blog is mentioned, and you are quoted in the May 4th edition of the “Vancouver Courier.” The opinion piece is titled, “Warning, this article may contain triggers.” You can view it online. Good on ‘ya! You’re having a positive impact! Several of my Aussie buddies are reading your blog now, too.

I apologise for the blog being so untidy so far and often written in a hurry, with those awful quotation marks using the wrong keys. To start with, I had no idea whether anyone would actually read it. Which is no excuse, but still. So I’m working on improving it at the moment.

Maria, check out this terrible story. While upsetting, it is very revealing. A Messianic Homosexual, a coterie of frustrated ‘fag hags’ trying to please him within a cult that saw demons everywhere. The rejected women throwing themselves at any man they can find. It’s chilling stuff.

So tragical, so pointless. Sometimes I wish religion just evaaporated altogether.

But that would be no guarantee of sick people stopping their delusions and attempts to control others.

Society at large knows about the major tragedies such as Jonestown and Waco (though of course the people at Waco were actually murdered).

But who knows just how many of these groups there are out there, with naive people getting sucked in. I don’t know why they don’t see the signs; why they don’t get out in good time.

In Romania we had this group called MISA (maybe it still exists). I saw a news report once about two sisters who had joined. What they said was “our parents gave us everything but not once a single I love you”. I think that is their trick; emotion; hooking people up to some pretend emotion to substitute something they longed for. It must be.

The author mentions people who would have gotten degrees an lived successful lives. And it’s not the first time I hear about people who are highly intelligent being sucked in by these abominable shysters. Scientology is (or was, anyway) full of such people with promising lives.

This blog is majorly fucking up technically. I’ve got entire paragraphs in my latest article not showing, for some reasons. The other day I couldn’t see avatars at all (not even mine). Perhaps the time has come to “go pro” and buy a domain to host this on. 🙂

Your blog is based on wordpress, which is free software. No one at “wordpress” has a benefit, if you “go pro” – you get the same software, but you have to install it yourself and maintain it yourself. There’s no need, to pay money. If you discover problems here, check your theme. Maybe you use a theme, that has problems with the latest version of wordpress, because it is not maintained any more.

I just tried to link to Priests For Life twice. Once to their website, and again to the YouTube channel. Both links are invisible on the blog; they are the same colour as the background as much as I try to make them stand out (though they do work if you click on that space). This is getting very strange.

They have not been taking new members for at least 6 weeks and it’s funny how it correlates with when the mods have a summer vacay. It keeps saying they will take new members in the first week of September and it is now Sept 5 & still the same message. hmmmm. What does that remind me of? I wonder if the mods/admin will be bored this next week when the summer &weekend holiday will be over. Why will it suddenly be all fine the first week of September? Too bad victims of horrifying abuse don’t get to take the summer off.

Absolutely, Maria is Right!
“It’s basically a trap. A very efficient, well-oiled trap.”

….of amusements to take us out from what really matters.
.
All of you have contributed monumentally for me to get on my feet to give more time and importance to where and to who I belong. For instance, my wife of 38 years of marriage recently and terribly passed away. Needlessly, recklessly and brutally she was rushed to an untimely death by unethical health care providers who are free because actual law insulate them from legal consequences.

Let me to add some balance to this insane well-oiled trap (matrix) we are living:
.
THE ONLY REASON WE ARE ALIVEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms7wQI_Q5iU
.
SAYING YEShttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKQavJZHRJU
*
It’s hard for me to say yes.
It’s easier for me to say
next year,
when the weather’s fine,
when I have the money, or the time,
or the relationship I want.
Or the career, or the house,
or the car, or the watch.
Watch life pass me by, waiting for an invitation,
when the world is greater than my nation or my occupation.
The only thing I know is that we’re all in this, together.
And the future of this Earth,
depends on how we treat each other.
But how we treat each other starts with how we treat ourselves.
And how we treat ourselves,
starts with how we see ourselves.
And how we see ourselves,
starts with context.
Nothing can exist
without its opposite.
Remember this
the next time you find you’re in an argument,
both sides are talking, sh*
and you forget your point,
except you’re angry now and want to win,
so you continue yelling,
till they give it up by giving in,
so you can stand victorious
because you’re right
on…what, again?
That’s why we send young people to war.
Young people tend to die without asking what for.
But one man’s ceiling is another man’s floor.
Let’s meet up in between,
said the ocean to the shore.
Hopelessly inquisitive,
a mind without a master.
I watched “The Master” on a tab of acid,
then performed after,
and yet myself was an unparallel disaster
’cause all my poems came out as…
(Laughter)
Do you laugh on instinct
or do you choose to laugh?
Do you ask because you care
or do you merely ask?
I ask you this because I care about how humans act.
We’re animals, aware of our future
and our past,
and this could be an obstacle to travelling our path.
Instead of just accepting where we are at,
we analyze our tracks for what we could’ve had,
looking back, focused on the memories
instead of on the facts, hence what we attract.
But it’s hard the fact that when we’re fast,
it really flashes past.
It’s an exponential graph
from creation into ash.
I’m sentimental one minute,
then I’m making plans,
staking claims, shaking hands,
breaking out or breaking in.
I have about a billion mimes,
hidden underneath my skin.
And they push my face into this grin,
or paw my wrinkled forehead in.
So, pour the gin!
Philosophize,
’cause no one has your awesome eyes.
Your view is worth the lows and highs
we go through on the coastal rides.
Control has got us holding on
when letting go could be more fun.
Hands up!
Everybody put your hands up.
Now feel the drop.
Shake it up!
Eventually, this all has to stop.
Level out and come back up until we reach the very top,
’cause one day, all your wheels fall off
so take advantage of your shocks.
Do something you’ve never done,
do someone you’ve never done.
(Laughter)
Go some place you’ve never gone.
Some place that will scare you some.
Be someone you’ve never been.
You feel all that adrenaline?
It’s medicine that jumpstart the spark inside your skeleton.
See? Everywhere you are, is where you’re supposed to be.
So hopefully, you’re hopelessly
as lost as me.
‘Cause if you’re not, you ought to be.
.
MY PHILOSOPHY FOR A HAPPY LIFEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36m1o-tM05g
.
THE PRISON OF YOUR MIND

I guess so many of us are tempted to, or sometimes wish to let that inner “madness” take over. To just be pure in our intent and action, all the time, without fear of being devoured by a mass of people in the process. Ego is driven by the need for societal acceptance to a point, I think. You mentioning these duels of ideas which are lost in the process is very true to our times, especially when “battling” strangers on the internet, which turns into a spectacle in and of itself.

And I’m sure many of those who take on militant positions today do so to be accepted, even though they might sense their fervour is not justified sometimes.